I think I see things more jadedly than you do.

Here's what I see of the situation. On a nation state level, nobody cares about the Palestinians. The Palestinians only influence on the chess board is their suffering. All of their 'allies' like Syria, Egypt and Iran don't care about the Palestinians for anything more than making sure that they suffer, the greater and the more public that suffering the better propaganda it makes. Israel and it's allies only care about the Palestinians in so far as that same suffering makes them look bad and sways public opinion as well. The threat from the Palestinians is a police and humanitarian matter, not a military one.

So everybody with boots on the ground doesn't care about the Palestinians. The Israeli side will take what they want as long as public opinion isn't too onerous on it. The Arab nations will actively arm, encite and push the Palestinians from peace to violence at ever turn because it ensures they serve their 'purpose' of public suffering better.

I count exactly zero hope for a two state solution reached between Palestinian and Israeli's as equals. A future of the region where the Palestinian people are afforded a better future either in a province of Israel, or their own state created under terms dictated to it by Israel I see as at least an existent possibility. I honestly believe seeking something more is simply not a possibility because NOBODY wants it. The Israeli's don't, the Palestinians allies don't, even the Palestinians themselves don't.

You seem to think maybe the parties can be made to change their minds on that, but it runs contrary to their self interests.

Israel gains nothing by backing down and negotiating as equals for a two state solution.

Palestine's 'allies' actually lose out greatly in any resolution to the status quo because it currently ties down Israel and makes for great propaganda. They'd lose that and gain nothing in return but less suffering for the Palestinians whom they don't care about.

Palestinians themselves might be persuaded to change their minds, but the only ones swaying their public opinion are their 'allies' with a vested interested in making sure they continue to fight forever for all of Palestine and not settle for two states. Additionally, for all intents and purposes their opinions don't matter anyways because they lack the power to make a meaningful difference.

None of the above is my opinion on how I would like things to be, nor how I think they should be, but rather how I see it actually looking. Nation state actions can usually be stripped down to narrow self interest and naught else. The exceptions are failures of the state representation, like say a dictator choosing their personal interest over a national one, or a buffoon blundering off into idiotic random actions...

Like accidentally pushing something over the edge of the platform? Or not securing the cargo and have it shaken overboard by vibrations during the move? Or having the top of the ladder come loose from the railing? Or the railing itself?

Nah, it's fine, just fine.

But I am curious. I have had to move a few times, and I have helped friends move a few times as well, for a total of maybe ~15 times. And the light stuff they put on the platform in this video has never bothered me. Granted, it has never been higher than 12th floor for me, but hauling bulky, "low-weight" stuff downstairs -- no issues. It's the heavy stuff through narrow stairwells that's been a pain in the behind. Yet they don't seem to have a net or tension belts attached to it, so do they use it for bulkier/heavy stuff as well?

Most martial arts are simply too specific for MMA (Teakwondo for example), and Aikido is certainly one of them. That's why many MMA fighters train in Jiu-Jitsu, it's a grabbag of techniques.
Aikido is great with throws, joint-locks and evasive moves but that's mostly it. There's no emphasis on kicking, punching or holding techniques. An Aikido-practitioner won't choke you out, he or she will break your shit. Bend your joints in ways they shouldn't or straight up break your arm. You can't unleash that in a ring where people go to earn money. No matter how many punches you can take, how many throws you can recover from, a broken wrist will end your fight. And then you're out of a job and training until it's healed for a couple of weeks.
Aikido is not flexible enough to be effective and too damaging once it can be used for full effect.
And it does work in real life, it's just the conditions for success are far narrower than with other, more versatile martial arts. That's why Krav Maga works so well in real life, it just goes to what causes the most effect. So a lot of ballskicking. And punching. And Kneeing. All the balls, all the time.

The confederate flag is being removed because it represents a deep seated division of the nation and culture and an exclusion of non-whites from humanity.
The LGTB/rainbow flag represents inclusion, and a rejection of divisive and exclusionary (and deeply held) "values" that, contrary to the most important teaching of their religion (the golden rule), allow some to force their narrow puritanical ideas about sexuality on others by force.
Total false equivalency.

Simple tests like this are meant to reveal how comfortable an applicant is at interpreting a problem and quickly translating it to code. It's analogous to how math tests in school required you to translate word problems to algebra. If someone struggles at this stage, they probably won't be a good coding hire. Or instead they might show some foresight into likely problems, gotchas, scalability, or testing.

I've been whiteboarded in a few interviews, and I've been hired based on a phone call. I don't know what the best method is, but I really hate the idea of "instant-fail" questions with a narrow "correct" answer. It's better to ask a few relatively easy, open-ended questions and see how comfortable the applicant is.

I tend to view the stigmatisation of a word to this degree as counter-productive since it shifts the focus away from the real problem - i.e. chronic inequality of income between black and white communities through poor public services that feeds a lack of opportunity for income mobility. Time spent discussing the degree to which users of the word should be shunned, whether it's said by a comedian, other black people, actual racists, is time not being spent discussing those material issues.

The base case of racism, i.e. the perpetuation of the view that black people are somehow genetically inferior or deserve to be subjugated in rights still certainly exists. What I suspect is more prevalent nowadays is discrimination founded in economic inequalities - the view that because black people are more likely to be poor, making the reflexive assumption they are more likely to resort to crime, and therefore are more dangerous and should be implicitly subject to harsher penalties. Which comes back to my main point, the best way to fix that is to actually narrow those economic inequalities.

Why spam a commercial for a corporate event from 2014? Bots with narrow tasks should have retirement clauses so they are not forced to suffer existence.

*ban.

Funny, Christians all dismiss thousands of years of multiple human cultures...(like any that deny or dispute the Christ story), but complain to no end if theirs is disputed or discarded in any way.

You've got to be kidding. The times when the most disgusting experiments were done is the exact same time when religious zealots inserted their "christian" religion into our government. (But certainly not it's teachings)

EDIT: Those cards only look like bricks from one narrow viewpoint. From any other view point it's undeniable that they are just paper thin and can't stand on their own. It's not about not giving them a second thought...it's that no matter how much you examine them they only appear solid from one specific position.

That was a lot of backhanded compliments and snark for someone pretending a nerve wasn't struck.

Monaco is a country ... Punctuation would have helped it, sorry bareboards2...Formula 1 has been racing there for years and the cars have gotten to such a size that passing is next to impossible, it's a very narrow race track. So what used to be a race looks like a very fast parade. So, the cars being able to pass each other makes for a more exciting race, thus it rocks. sorry for the confusion. Loki

But it's not really solving a problem, is it? If you have a 3rd Testament then people a century later need a 4th Testament to understand the 3rd. It's just endless guessing.

The many confusions & consistencies deal with God's actions toward the peoples of its time. In this video's case, Paul to the Corinthian believers (people-people). My "narrow-minded" guess, is the "women" at the Corinthian church were there not as seekers of the Faith, but as wives just accompanying their husbands, so these females gathered around and started gossiping and various sundry conversations, turning bothersome to the brothers listening to the sermons... so that's why Paul ordered the women silenced. Now, that's MY interpretation, you can argue it's sexist/degrading of me calling the women gossipy (but bear with me for argument sake, because those men at those times are likely sexist!)... but that's one possible scenario. There can very well be other equally (or likely more) convincing scenarios, but only one of them is the truth. But which one is? Who has the authority to know and write down the true case in this 3rd Testament?

People have been discussing for centuries and I don't see the point of reading the Bible literally and try to interpret meanings on these small things. Humans in the Bible all make mistakes. We need to keep on progressing to make the world a better place. That's what Jesus advocated... Picking faults of the people in Bible is useful if we use them as examples of never repeating their faults. But it's no good if we're too focused on finding faults but lost sight of doing good.

Not at all.

They two pedestrians should have moved over for the car in the first place.

Why didn't they? Can't be sure.

Was there a giant puddle they were avoiding? That's not clear. It looks like there was a sidewalk, but still no bike lane for the cyclists who starts the video avoiding other traffic on a narrow road.

One thing that is clear is that it's not the pedestrians who started yelling. Even if the pedestrians were in the wrong for not yielding to the vehicle (they should have moved over) it was the driver who escalated the situation. This makes the driver the biggest jerk.

(I still think it looks staged.)

this could not have come at a more perfect time.this week i have been accused of being a:racist,misogynist pig,cis gendered white privileged meat sack,republican tool,trump supporter(seriously?),christian nutter...the list has been long.

all because i had the audacity to point out that:obama is not a progressive,trump has actually attempted to some decent things,the ANTIFA movement is an ill-thought and hypocritical movement,the DNC is a corrupt and failing institution,the left is dead politically in america,the democratic party is one election away from being left in obscurity and that both trump and obama should be tried for war crimes.

i was seriously struggling why people refused to examine or scrutinize their own beloved political figure,but had no issue ridiculing the most inane activities of the person they hate.

i had sincerely asked how a morally justified movement could even fathom that fighting oppression and fascism,with oppression and fascism could ever be considered a solid and positive tactic.

i had people i admired and respected perform mental gymnastics so impressive that they were truly convinced that obama not indicting a single wall street CEO,was not obama bowing to the financial industry,but rather supporting his constituency.

and the presumption of some of these people,basing their opinions on so little,was staggering.even when i attempted to clarify that their assumptions were wrong,and that i was simply asking for the reasons why someone would ignore the mountain of damning evidence.they held on to their assumptions like a small child with a candy bar...

i am pretty thick skinned,and do not take much personally,but many of these people are people i like,admire and respect.that is a bitter pill that is far harder to swallow.

so thanks for that mate,it really put things in perspective for me.time for me to just go do my thing and not get hung up on other peoples biases and prejudices.they can think what they want,i will not let their narrow mindedness dictate how i feel.

that is their deal.

I have too many to narrow down.

@eric3579
agreed,and i suspect most people struggle with this,but i think he made a really important point that we all need to address,and that is our own bias.

too many people for far too long have sought information that aligns with their own narrative,their own,personal and subjective understandings.we see those who identify as conservative reject anything that does not adhere to their own,narrow worldview,and we see those who identify as progressive do the exact same thing.

and yet if challenged,BOTH will stubbornly declare that their information is solid and without reproach.this is statistically impossible.

another great point he makes is how some people have been conditioned to accept opinion and conflict as somehow being "news".

he also makes a point on how some news outlets have done shoddy and poor work,but we should not throw the baby out with the bath water.while this may be true,i feel he was far too lenient on those who profess to be journalists.he gives them a pass for doing mediocre work,because that is what many journalists do in this new climate of:partisan hackery,access and propaganda.

so when we talk about "mainstream media",we are talking about only a few,monolithic corporations who DO have an agenda,and that agenda is PROFIT.

so we can look back to the run up to the iraq war,and see how phil donahue was fired from MSNBC for being critical of the war.the highest rated show on that network at that time.so if PROFIT is the model,then donahue being fired makes no sense..UNLESS you consider that the owners of MSNBC were general electric,who at that time were heavily invested in military contracts on the dawn of a new war.

so the profit was not from advertising from donahue's show,but rather the billions in defense contracts general electric was poised to receive from the impending iraq war,and donahue's criticisms of that war had the possibility to affect the profits of general electric.

and that is the one point that is missing from mr green's take on the mainstream media:their inability or outright refusal to criticize the current corporate establishment,and how many journalists kneel at the altar of their corporate masters.

so while he makes a lot of great points.that particular glaring omission is disturbing.

speaking only for myself i tend to only consume independent media,and focus on journalists who have earned my trust.

ultimately it is up to us to decide who we trust and who we are suspicious of,and to discuss those important issues among ourselves to better refine our understandings.

"LUKE
Well, I didn't...

The princess grabs Luke's gun and fires at a small grate in
the wall next to Han, almost frying him.

HAN
What the hell are you doing?

LEIA
Somebody has to save our skins. Into
the garbage chute, wise guy.

She jumps through the narrow opening as Han and Chewbacca
look on in amazement. Chewbacca sniffs the garbage chute and
says something.

HAN
Get in there you big furry oaf! I
don't care what you smell! Get in
there and don't worry about it.

Han gives him a kick and the Wookiee disappears into the
tiny opening. Luke and Han continue firing as they work their
way toward the opening."